NEW Studio One v3 updates incoming.

[LawrenceF]

just pointing out the bad stuff really winds you up

Not really. I more (just out of curiosity really) wonder why anyone spends more than a few seconds even thinking about such relative irrelevant stuff.

Like I said earlier, their marketeers (and some others) have permanent batteries and it's often a good laugh to read some of it, but I've seen that stuff for 40+ years all over, people hyping and/or over-hyping to sell stuff, so I don't understand why it drives people so crazy. That's all.

If I say ... for example ... "Industry Standard" ... for PT, it drives some people batshit nuts and they spend lots of time and many pages arguing why it's not the industry standard. It's all a little insane to me, that's all.

To your point though... I'll keep those thoughts to myself going forward. Thanks Bungle.

[bungle]

Feels the same about what, that that feature isn't revolutionary ? As in already possible with a VST SKnote Strip, or that it wasn't worthy of the hype ?

Is SKnote Strip free?

... somebody else thinks it's "revolutionary"....

The revolutionary part for me is how it's implemented, not the actual effect. You won't have to put that plugin on every channel, you just have to do it on a bus and this way you use less CPU. And the best part is that's acting like it's on every channel that goes in that bus.

Is SKnote Strip free no, but it has multiple console types, you think the next available console for mix fx will be as cheap as Strip ?

OK so above is a perfect example of how marketing is already tricking people, this is exactly why it is not irrelevant, for some reason, because only one instance is seen of a front end of a plugin, this poster thinks that it will save CPU because it is just on a bus, now nobody has bothered to explain here that actually that process is on every single channel feeding the bus, not just the bus, in fact a few tests have already been done and it uses more cpu than VCC, there is no way that mix fx can save or use extra cpu cycles unless programmed rather badly, compared to the same algo in a VST, the fact that it uses more than VCC on the same channel count does not necassarily mean mix fx is worse than VST, it could mean the algo used is a bit heavier, like Lawrence has said, they are doing nothing new here, they are just doing it in a new way, the math is still the same math.

[LawrenceF]

how marketing is already tricking people

That's kinda my point actually. That an adult, any intelligent adult, who get's "tricked" by marketing (whatever that means) just didn't do their homework. No matter what marketing says about any software, a reasonable adult should try a thing and make up their own mind, always.

Why would any intelligent adult ever do anything else? (Except for G.A.S.)

But sure, if there's a 12 year old here who doesn't know any better yet... sure... beware ye kid... marketing is often not reality.

[SLiC]

As far as I know, S1 is the only full DAW that is emulating analogue before the summed audio busses. They have opened that emulation to others such as VCC to give the entire DAW a different recording sound, like recording through a different desk. General feedback on 'other' forums (that care more about the sound of the DAW than the marketing) is that it is very good and it is something new that can not be done at this time by other DAWS.

This conversation about marketing is getting a little abstract, maybe take it to the lounge- I am just following the Gearsluts and S1 forums now as there is nothing about music here....

[BushidoBroWWN]

I like a lot of the new features they've added, comping looks great. The ability to change the color of the different takes to differentiate them on the main track is a really simple but useful feature. Not sure how I feel about the new mix fx yet, the whole analog console/tape plugin craze never really interested me all that much.

Still bummed there are no performance updates for mac. I like a lot of things about Studio One but it is still the most cpu intensive daw I've ever used.

[Flandersh]

I do not know what the Mix Engine FX is all about, and so I may be off the road. But as I understand it, the Mix Engine FX may be of such a character that a description of it as a plugin format may be somehow misleading, as it may not be in the same league as in example VST, RE and so. Descriptions like "modular mixer", "mixer customization" etc. could well have done it. Reason have its SSL console, Sonar its Console Emulator, Cubase its MixConsole. Studio One join the game now with the addition that their console is open to third-party developers. As different console emulations work for different mixes, to have the option to choose from different high quality developers in this is at least for me a game changer.

[trimph1]

Yeah. I like the new features in S3.2 but some of us are not keen on seeing marketing like that.

I have worked in marketing management and I have to say it can get really stupid. I have seen some times when marketing would blather about a product when the prototype wasn't even off the shop floor yet.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I do not know what the Mix Engine FX is all about, and so I may be off the road. But as I understand it, the Mix Engine FX may be of such a character that a description of it as a plugin format may be somehow misleading, as it may not be in the same league as in example VST, RE and so. Descriptions like "modular mixer", "mixer customization" etc. could well have done it. Reason have its SSL console, Sonar its Console Emulator, Cubase its MixConsole. Studio One join the game now with the addition that their console is open to third-party developers. As different console emulations work for different mixes, to have the option to choose from different high quality developers in this is at least for me a game changer.

The difference between what Studio One is doing with Mix Engine FX and Sonar's Pro-Channel effect is that the Mix Engine FX are at the mix engine level. This allows for channel 1 to bleed into channel 2, and bleed into channel 3, etc. Sonar's Pro Channel can't operate this way since it's basically sitting on top of the mix engine, versus inside of it. Hope that makes sense.

[woodsdenis]

As far as I know, S1 is the only full DAW that is emulating analogue before the summed audio busses.

Pro Tools Heat has been there for years.

[Robmobius]

As far as I know, S1 is the only full DAW that is emulating analogue before the summed audio busses.

Pro Tools Heat has been there for years.

Yeah but is it any good?

[woodsdenis]

As far as I know, S1 is the only full DAW that is emulating analogue before the summed audio busses.

Pro Tools Heat has been there for years.

Yeah but is it any good?

https://www.avid.com/US/products/HEAT Check it out

The only issue with proprietary plugins is you can only use them in one DAW. With Slate porting over his emu stuff how much is the cost difference between the 2 different versions ? We shall see. Also Dave Hill coded Avid and Francois Gabriel coded Slate, two of the best software engineers out there. Who coded the Presonus one ?

[xbitz]

still dunno why they created macros if it can't be automated ???



back to Cubase

[SeeingInMidi]

Console Shaper is pretty great, wouldn't call it "new" since it's been done before in pro tools but it is pretty revolutionary in terms of workflow specifically in studio one. Can't wait to see what developers like slate will do with this technology.

[OutCider]

I have seen some times when marketing would blather about a product when the prototype wasn't even off the shop floor yet.

Enough of the xil's reps drum machine. Back on topic

[SLiC]

As far as I know, S1 is the only full DAW that is emulating analogue before the summed audio busses.

Pro Tools Heat has been there for years.

Yeah but is it any good?

https://www.avid.com/US/products/HEAT Check it out

The only issue with proprietary plugins is you can only use them in one DAW. With Slate porting over his emu stuff how much is the cost difference between the 2 different versions ? We shall see. Also Dave Hill coded Avid and Francois Gabriel coded Slate, two of the best software engineers out there. Who coded the Presonus one ?

Interesting. I couldn't find anything about how it intigrates, but obviusly S1 had an eye on this, it seems to be protools users they are after. I guess the only difference (assuming the position is before the mixer is the same to emulate crosstalk etc) will be the open platform perhaps giving S1 users more choice....slate VC is apparently next up....